Monday, March 22, 2010
JUST A THOUGHT
45,000 people die each year because they do not have health insurance. If 45,000 soldiers were killed each year Iraq, we would have a revolt.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
MIDDLE CLASS LOSING HEALTH INSURANCE FASTER THAN THE RICH OR POOR
(FROM HUFFINGTON POST -MARCH 18,2010)
It's the biggest "doughnut hole" of them all: Members of the middle class are losing their health insurance faster than any other income group, according to a new report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The number of middle-income earners covered by employer health insurance fell by three million from 2000 to 2008, and government programs and the individual market aren't picking up the slack. The total number of uninsured middle-income earners rose from 10.5 million to 12.9 million, representing 16.2 percent of the income bracket -- a bigger increase than for any other income group.
"It really underscores how the problem of uninsurance is not something simply affecting lower-income Americans but is increasingly affecting the middle class," said Brian Quinn, the foundation's research and evaluation office. The most recent Census Bureau estimate puts the total uninsured population at 46.3 million.
Just 66 percent of people in families earning between $45,000 and $85,000 are insured through an employer plan -- 52.7 million people, down from 55.5 million eight years prior -- a drop of nearly seven percentage points.
People who earn less money were more likely to lose employer coverage, but also more likely to be covered by a government program like Medicaid. According to the report, only about half of the decline in employer-sponsored coverage for middle-income earners was offset by government insurance programs.
Those who missed the safety net have been flung into the cold-hearted individual market, where insurance companies deny coverage based on preexisting conditions and charge exorbitant, ever-increasing premiums. (Insurance companies, whose executives earn million-dollar salaries, routinely plead that other industries within the health sector have much fatter profit margins.)
"For a lot of middle class Americans, the individual market is not a real option," said Quinn.
According to the report, the cost for an employer to offer individual and family plans to workers increased 43 percent and 55.6 percent, respectively, during the eight-year period. The amount employees paid for the single and family programs increased 64.5 percent and 80.5 percent. Median household income has fallen 3.5 percent to $51,233.
Click HERE to download a PDF of the report, prepared for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation by researchers at the State Health Access Data Assistance Center, University of Minnesota--Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau (1999, 2000, 2007 and 2008) and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, conducted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (1999-2001 and 2008). Get HuffPost Business On Twitter, Facebook, and Google Buzz! Know something we don't? E-mail us at huffpostbiz@gmail.com
It's the biggest "doughnut hole" of them all: Members of the middle class are losing their health insurance faster than any other income group, according to a new report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The number of middle-income earners covered by employer health insurance fell by three million from 2000 to 2008, and government programs and the individual market aren't picking up the slack. The total number of uninsured middle-income earners rose from 10.5 million to 12.9 million, representing 16.2 percent of the income bracket -- a bigger increase than for any other income group.
"It really underscores how the problem of uninsurance is not something simply affecting lower-income Americans but is increasingly affecting the middle class," said Brian Quinn, the foundation's research and evaluation office. The most recent Census Bureau estimate puts the total uninsured population at 46.3 million.
Just 66 percent of people in families earning between $45,000 and $85,000 are insured through an employer plan -- 52.7 million people, down from 55.5 million eight years prior -- a drop of nearly seven percentage points.
People who earn less money were more likely to lose employer coverage, but also more likely to be covered by a government program like Medicaid. According to the report, only about half of the decline in employer-sponsored coverage for middle-income earners was offset by government insurance programs.
Those who missed the safety net have been flung into the cold-hearted individual market, where insurance companies deny coverage based on preexisting conditions and charge exorbitant, ever-increasing premiums. (Insurance companies, whose executives earn million-dollar salaries, routinely plead that other industries within the health sector have much fatter profit margins.)
"For a lot of middle class Americans, the individual market is not a real option," said Quinn.
According to the report, the cost for an employer to offer individual and family plans to workers increased 43 percent and 55.6 percent, respectively, during the eight-year period. The amount employees paid for the single and family programs increased 64.5 percent and 80.5 percent. Median household income has fallen 3.5 percent to $51,233.
Click HERE to download a PDF of the report, prepared for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation by researchers at the State Health Access Data Assistance Center, University of Minnesota--Using data from the U.S. Census Bureau (1999, 2000, 2007 and 2008) and the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, conducted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (1999-2001 and 2008). Get HuffPost Business On Twitter, Facebook, and Google Buzz! Know something we don't? E-mail us at huffpostbiz@gmail.com
Monday, March 15, 2010
THE COST OF FAILURE TO ENACT HEALTH REFORM - FROM RWJ FOUNDATION
The Cost of Failure to Enact Health Reform
2010-2020
By: Garrett B, Buettgens M, Doan L, Headen I and Holahan J
Publisher: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation/Urban Institute
Published: Mar 15, 2010
The number of uninsured Americans could grow by 10 million people in just five years, and spending on government health care programs for the poor could more than double by 2020, if there are not significant reforms to the current health care system, according to a new analysis just released from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF).
Urban Institute researchers used their Health Insurance Policy Simulation Model to assess the changes in coverage patterns and health care costs that will occur nationally from 2010 to 2020 if major reforms are not enacted. The authors provide a range of scenarios to assess the effects. In the worst case:
By 2015, there could be 59.7 million people uninsured. The number could swell to 67.6 million by 2020. An estimated 49.4 million individuals were uninsured in 2010.
Middle-class households would suffer most without reform, with the percentage of these families without health coverage rising from 19 percent today to 28 percent at decade’s end.
As premiums nearly double, employees in small firms would see offers of health insurance almost cut in half, dropping from 41 percent of firms offering insurance in 2010 to 23 percent in 2020.
For employers who continued to offer health insurance, more of the costs would likely be passed on to workers. At the same time, individuals and families would face higher out-of-pocket costs for premiums and health care services. Their spending will jump 34 percent by 2015 and 79 percent by 2020.
The analysis is an update of a report prepared by the Urban Institute last year on the economic impact for the nation and individuals if the health reform effort were to fail. The new report presents fresh findings on the composition of the uninsured in 2020 without reform, the offers of health benefits by employers and the increase in costs to different payers.
It is being released today as part of Cover the Uninsured Week (March 14-20), a nonpartisan campaign organized by RWJF to advocate for health coverage for all Americans. Now in its eighth year, it has become the largest, nonpartisan mobilization in history seeking solutions for the millions of Americans who are uninsured.
2010-2020
By: Garrett B, Buettgens M, Doan L, Headen I and Holahan J
Publisher: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation/Urban Institute
Published: Mar 15, 2010
The number of uninsured Americans could grow by 10 million people in just five years, and spending on government health care programs for the poor could more than double by 2020, if there are not significant reforms to the current health care system, according to a new analysis just released from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF).
Urban Institute researchers used their Health Insurance Policy Simulation Model to assess the changes in coverage patterns and health care costs that will occur nationally from 2010 to 2020 if major reforms are not enacted. The authors provide a range of scenarios to assess the effects. In the worst case:
By 2015, there could be 59.7 million people uninsured. The number could swell to 67.6 million by 2020. An estimated 49.4 million individuals were uninsured in 2010.
Middle-class households would suffer most without reform, with the percentage of these families without health coverage rising from 19 percent today to 28 percent at decade’s end.
As premiums nearly double, employees in small firms would see offers of health insurance almost cut in half, dropping from 41 percent of firms offering insurance in 2010 to 23 percent in 2020.
For employers who continued to offer health insurance, more of the costs would likely be passed on to workers. At the same time, individuals and families would face higher out-of-pocket costs for premiums and health care services. Their spending will jump 34 percent by 2015 and 79 percent by 2020.
The analysis is an update of a report prepared by the Urban Institute last year on the economic impact for the nation and individuals if the health reform effort were to fail. The new report presents fresh findings on the composition of the uninsured in 2020 without reform, the offers of health benefits by employers and the increase in costs to different payers.
It is being released today as part of Cover the Uninsured Week (March 14-20), a nonpartisan campaign organized by RWJF to advocate for health coverage for all Americans. Now in its eighth year, it has become the largest, nonpartisan mobilization in history seeking solutions for the millions of Americans who are uninsured.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
WE DON'T NEED HEALTH CARE REFORM - WE NEED INSURANCE REFORM
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON – Eye-popping health insurance premium increases of up to 39 percent are not an exception but a worrisome sign of the times, the Obama administration said in a report Thursday.
Proposed premium increases by Anthem Blue Cross for Californians purchasing their own coverage set off a wave of criticism and forced the company last week to announce a postponement. Now, the Health and Human Services Department says similar pressure on premiums is being felt in at least six other states.
"This shocking increase isn't unique," said the report, being presented by Secretary Kathleen Sebelius at a news conference Thursday. "Across the country, families have seen their premiums skyrocket in recent years, and experts predict these increases will continue."
With his drive for health care overhaul bogged down, President Barack Obama has seized on the Anthem premium increases as Exhibit A to make his case for sweeping change before a bipartisan White House summit next week. California officials say 700,000 households face increases averaging 25 percent overall and as high as 39 percent for some.
The HHS report found that those numbers are in line with increases sought by insurers in other states — at a time of robust profit growth for the companies and a lack of competition in most states.
For example, Anthem in Maine was denied an 18.5 percent increase last year and is now requesting that state regulators approve a 23 percent rise. Maine is home to Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, Republican moderates whose support Obama would like to have for his health care legislation.
Michigan's Blue Cross Blue Shield plan requested approval for premium increases of 56 percent in 2009. And in the state of Washington, rates for some individual health plans increased by up to 40 percent until regulators cracked down.
Other states cited in the report were Connecticut, Oregon and Rhode Island.
The premium increases affect the most vulnerable part of the health insurance market, policies marketed individually to customers buying their own plans. According to the Census Bureau, only about 9 percent of Americans purchase coverage directly, while nearly 60 percent are covered under employer plans. Family premiums for those with workplace coverage rose 5 percent last year, even as inflation fell 1 percent, but nowhere near the rates seen in the individual market.
The health care legislation pending in Congress aims mainly to address the insurance problems of individuals and small businesses. While requiring most Americans to carry coverage, it would provide subsidies to make premiums more affordable. It would also create a new kind of insurance supermarket for individuals and small businesses, offering a range of competitive plans comparable to what federal employees have.
Insurers say the push for higher premiums reflects supply and demand. Medical costs keep going up, even in a weak economy. Many healthy people are dropping coverage or switching to bare-bones policies to keep their bills down. That leaves a higher proportion of people with health problems in the risk pool, forcing the steep rate increases.
WASHINGTON – Eye-popping health insurance premium increases of up to 39 percent are not an exception but a worrisome sign of the times, the Obama administration said in a report Thursday.
Proposed premium increases by Anthem Blue Cross for Californians purchasing their own coverage set off a wave of criticism and forced the company last week to announce a postponement. Now, the Health and Human Services Department says similar pressure on premiums is being felt in at least six other states.
"This shocking increase isn't unique," said the report, being presented by Secretary Kathleen Sebelius at a news conference Thursday. "Across the country, families have seen their premiums skyrocket in recent years, and experts predict these increases will continue."
With his drive for health care overhaul bogged down, President Barack Obama has seized on the Anthem premium increases as Exhibit A to make his case for sweeping change before a bipartisan White House summit next week. California officials say 700,000 households face increases averaging 25 percent overall and as high as 39 percent for some.
The HHS report found that those numbers are in line with increases sought by insurers in other states — at a time of robust profit growth for the companies and a lack of competition in most states.
For example, Anthem in Maine was denied an 18.5 percent increase last year and is now requesting that state regulators approve a 23 percent rise. Maine is home to Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, Republican moderates whose support Obama would like to have for his health care legislation.
Michigan's Blue Cross Blue Shield plan requested approval for premium increases of 56 percent in 2009. And in the state of Washington, rates for some individual health plans increased by up to 40 percent until regulators cracked down.
Other states cited in the report were Connecticut, Oregon and Rhode Island.
The premium increases affect the most vulnerable part of the health insurance market, policies marketed individually to customers buying their own plans. According to the Census Bureau, only about 9 percent of Americans purchase coverage directly, while nearly 60 percent are covered under employer plans. Family premiums for those with workplace coverage rose 5 percent last year, even as inflation fell 1 percent, but nowhere near the rates seen in the individual market.
The health care legislation pending in Congress aims mainly to address the insurance problems of individuals and small businesses. While requiring most Americans to carry coverage, it would provide subsidies to make premiums more affordable. It would also create a new kind of insurance supermarket for individuals and small businesses, offering a range of competitive plans comparable to what federal employees have.
Insurers say the push for higher premiums reflects supply and demand. Medical costs keep going up, even in a weak economy. Many healthy people are dropping coverage or switching to bare-bones policies to keep their bills down. That leaves a higher proportion of people with health problems in the risk pool, forcing the steep rate increases.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
WE ARE MOVING TOWARD A NEW KIND OF GROWTH
(From Tor Dahl & Associates - www.tordahl.com )
The industrial revolution started with James Watt's invention of a
commercially viable steam engine in 1776.
Over the roughly one million years of human development, the industrial
age constitutes only 233 years. Were we to force that time span into 24
hours, we would only have been industrialized for 20 seconds.
In nature, it seems that everything either grows or dies. But nature is
not simple. Farmers know that for a field to regenerate, it must be
allowed to fallow. For the farmer, fallowing forsakes current income in
order to produce higher future yields. That is actually a definition of
investment. The problem is that we confuse no-growth fallowing with lack
of progress - because continuous growth has also become synonymous with
progress in the public mind.
But much happens during fallowing. Farmers plow the ground so that weeds
can be brought to the surface and removed and the soil structure
improved so that it can better absorb water and nutrients. Earthworms
enrich the soil, microorganisms flourish, and when the fallow field is
planted again, rising yields more than compensate for the pause.
For 235 years, we have harvested more from the Earth than we did over
the entire period prior to the industrial revolution. We have learned
some important lessons from that experience:
1. Not all growth is good for us.
There used to be abundant water, abundant breathable air, abundant
fisheries, and abundant energy for our daily needs. New scarcities have
emerged relating to groundwater, fossil fuels, world fisheries and
recently, world harvests. And in many cities, breathable air is still
lacking.
2. New scarcities emerged because we have been consuming beyond our
means.
Starting in 1973 growth in wages fell below our growth in consumption.
Household debt between 1973 and today increased 13 times, government's
debt increased 20 times, but wages grew by only 1.86 times. We became
overextended, and the only way to finance the debt was by hoping for
continual increases in the prices of the assets that we had acquired at
a time when we thought we could afford them. The private savings rate
turned negative in 2005. Asset prices entered a free fall in 2007:
Prices of housing, stocks and commodities all dropped dramatically.
3. The economy was like a field that had been exploited without
pause. To meet our needs, we even consumed part of the seed corn: What
we should have invested, we consumed.
A real field is restored through fallowing. So is the real economy.
The pause that is now imposed on us forces the regeneration that is
needed.
How does a real economy fallow?
We see it all around us: People cook at home instead of eating out.
People are going to the library again. People are staying home rather
than vacationing in distant and expensive places. People are repairing
their shoes, mending their clothing, remodeling their homes, going for
walks, shopping at local farmers' markets, attending school at night,
staying healthy, postponing cosmetic surgery - maybe canceling it
altogether.
But does not all this make us poorer?
No. The Gross National Product is a poor measure of our wealth. The
early economists measured our wealth in satisfaction, and satisfaction
in the U.S. peaked in the fifties. Beyond the necessities of food,
clothing, shelter, education and health, satisfaction does not increase
with additional wealth accumulation. In fact, our current stress and
insecurities largely stem from the very possessions we accumulated at a
time when we lived beyond our means.
What is the New Growth referred to in the headline?
It will be a shift of focus from investing to meet human needs rather
than human wants.
There is no limit to human wants. Human needs, however, signal when
they are met. Meeting these needs often doesn't cost any money.
So - what are the human needs that also increase human capital? How can
we improve our yield of life satisfaction by forsaking excessive
consumption?
The first priority is to increase our ability to contribute both to the
satisfaction of others and to that of ourselves. This could happen
through serving as volunteers in organizations we support, learning new
skills, teaching others the skills we have, and helping people in need.
Then, take care of our own health so that we do not become a burden to
others: A healthy diet, long walks, attending to weight and blood
pressure, and dropping unhealthy habits would all do wonders for our
health.
Keep in mind that the eternal scarcities are time, space and human
interaction. An economist's advice to you would be to allocate your time
so that it maximizes satisfaction with life, organize your space so it
is not an obstacle to what you need to live, and be with people who make
you happy.
None of this is measured and included in the GDP. We have only the
vaguest idea of how much human capital we add to our collective wealth
each year.
But we know it when we are investing in our own human capital.
We know it, because we see how we can contribute more, how we can help
more, and how we can build a richer community life.
One day some bright scientist will find a good way of measuring our
increased capacity, our increased human capital, and make it visible to
all.
In the meantime, let the economy fallow for a while. Let us bring back
the sense of security of living within our means. For those who may be
laid off for awhile: Rethink what you most would like to do on this
Earth. Then start it. You will find a way. And for all the rest:
Find out how you can help!
During World War II, Norwegians were healthier than ever. They could
not buy tobacco, and sugar was in short supply. Refined flour was
severely rationed. But the ocean teemed with fish, vegetable gardens
flourished on city lots, and people picked fruit and berries to preserve
them for the long winters.
We certainly had become poorer measured in money. But I cannot recall a
time when the community was more united, friendships and will to
sacrifice were stronger, and ingenuity in making do with what we had was
more prevalent.
Now Norway is one of the richest countries in the world in per capita
income. Norway also has no government debt and owns the third largest
sovereign fund in the world. What could they work on now in that
beautiful and well-run country? Well, Norway ranks No.27 in freedom,
No.9 in safety, No.12 in justice, No.13 in competitiveness, and No.19 in
happiness compared to other nations.
It is a challenging agenda to make every citizen freer, safer, more
justly treated, more competitive, and happier. Economists can estimate
the wealth increase that will follow from moving forward all these
areas, except maybe happiness.
Happiness is elusive. It is summoned by reaching out rather than
turning inward. What we do for others is more strongly satisfying than
what we do for ourselves. From an evolutionary perspective, that is
what helps us survive as a species - whether it is barn raising on the
North Dakota prairie or fighting disease in Africa.
In our final hours we are not likely to focus on our possessions - we
shall probably think about what made our lives richer and more
fulfilling. We shall remember those moments when we experienced what
Thomas Hood described as 'a happiness that made the heart afraid'. We
shall visit memories of both happiness and sorrow, both victories and
defeats, and we might ponder how we could have lived an even better
life.
But if we have learned, and grown, and loved, and contributed, I know
the feeling we would all have: What a splendid ride! What a glorious
life!
But why did life put us through all these tests before we had learned
life's lessons? And could we not have learned those lessons before we
faced the tests?
I think we could have. That is precisely what would have changed our
lives, and the world, for the better.
How about acting on life's lessons now? Before it is too late?
.
________________________________
Tor Dahl & Associates
Productivity Improvement Seminars, Projects and Tools
The industrial revolution started with James Watt's invention of a
commercially viable steam engine in 1776.
Over the roughly one million years of human development, the industrial
age constitutes only 233 years. Were we to force that time span into 24
hours, we would only have been industrialized for 20 seconds.
In nature, it seems that everything either grows or dies. But nature is
not simple. Farmers know that for a field to regenerate, it must be
allowed to fallow. For the farmer, fallowing forsakes current income in
order to produce higher future yields. That is actually a definition of
investment. The problem is that we confuse no-growth fallowing with lack
of progress - because continuous growth has also become synonymous with
progress in the public mind.
But much happens during fallowing. Farmers plow the ground so that weeds
can be brought to the surface and removed and the soil structure
improved so that it can better absorb water and nutrients. Earthworms
enrich the soil, microorganisms flourish, and when the fallow field is
planted again, rising yields more than compensate for the pause.
For 235 years, we have harvested more from the Earth than we did over
the entire period prior to the industrial revolution. We have learned
some important lessons from that experience:
1. Not all growth is good for us.
There used to be abundant water, abundant breathable air, abundant
fisheries, and abundant energy for our daily needs. New scarcities have
emerged relating to groundwater, fossil fuels, world fisheries and
recently, world harvests. And in many cities, breathable air is still
lacking.
2. New scarcities emerged because we have been consuming beyond our
means.
Starting in 1973 growth in wages fell below our growth in consumption.
Household debt between 1973 and today increased 13 times, government's
debt increased 20 times, but wages grew by only 1.86 times. We became
overextended, and the only way to finance the debt was by hoping for
continual increases in the prices of the assets that we had acquired at
a time when we thought we could afford them. The private savings rate
turned negative in 2005. Asset prices entered a free fall in 2007:
Prices of housing, stocks and commodities all dropped dramatically.
3. The economy was like a field that had been exploited without
pause. To meet our needs, we even consumed part of the seed corn: What
we should have invested, we consumed.
A real field is restored through fallowing. So is the real economy.
The pause that is now imposed on us forces the regeneration that is
needed.
How does a real economy fallow?
We see it all around us: People cook at home instead of eating out.
People are going to the library again. People are staying home rather
than vacationing in distant and expensive places. People are repairing
their shoes, mending their clothing, remodeling their homes, going for
walks, shopping at local farmers' markets, attending school at night,
staying healthy, postponing cosmetic surgery - maybe canceling it
altogether.
But does not all this make us poorer?
No. The Gross National Product is a poor measure of our wealth. The
early economists measured our wealth in satisfaction, and satisfaction
in the U.S. peaked in the fifties. Beyond the necessities of food,
clothing, shelter, education and health, satisfaction does not increase
with additional wealth accumulation. In fact, our current stress and
insecurities largely stem from the very possessions we accumulated at a
time when we lived beyond our means.
What is the New Growth referred to in the headline?
It will be a shift of focus from investing to meet human needs rather
than human wants.
There is no limit to human wants. Human needs, however, signal when
they are met. Meeting these needs often doesn't cost any money.
So - what are the human needs that also increase human capital? How can
we improve our yield of life satisfaction by forsaking excessive
consumption?
The first priority is to increase our ability to contribute both to the
satisfaction of others and to that of ourselves. This could happen
through serving as volunteers in organizations we support, learning new
skills, teaching others the skills we have, and helping people in need.
Then, take care of our own health so that we do not become a burden to
others: A healthy diet, long walks, attending to weight and blood
pressure, and dropping unhealthy habits would all do wonders for our
health.
Keep in mind that the eternal scarcities are time, space and human
interaction. An economist's advice to you would be to allocate your time
so that it maximizes satisfaction with life, organize your space so it
is not an obstacle to what you need to live, and be with people who make
you happy.
None of this is measured and included in the GDP. We have only the
vaguest idea of how much human capital we add to our collective wealth
each year.
But we know it when we are investing in our own human capital.
We know it, because we see how we can contribute more, how we can help
more, and how we can build a richer community life.
One day some bright scientist will find a good way of measuring our
increased capacity, our increased human capital, and make it visible to
all.
In the meantime, let the economy fallow for a while. Let us bring back
the sense of security of living within our means. For those who may be
laid off for awhile: Rethink what you most would like to do on this
Earth. Then start it. You will find a way. And for all the rest:
Find out how you can help!
During World War II, Norwegians were healthier than ever. They could
not buy tobacco, and sugar was in short supply. Refined flour was
severely rationed. But the ocean teemed with fish, vegetable gardens
flourished on city lots, and people picked fruit and berries to preserve
them for the long winters.
We certainly had become poorer measured in money. But I cannot recall a
time when the community was more united, friendships and will to
sacrifice were stronger, and ingenuity in making do with what we had was
more prevalent.
Now Norway is one of the richest countries in the world in per capita
income. Norway also has no government debt and owns the third largest
sovereign fund in the world. What could they work on now in that
beautiful and well-run country? Well, Norway ranks No.27 in freedom,
No.9 in safety, No.12 in justice, No.13 in competitiveness, and No.19 in
happiness compared to other nations.
It is a challenging agenda to make every citizen freer, safer, more
justly treated, more competitive, and happier. Economists can estimate
the wealth increase that will follow from moving forward all these
areas, except maybe happiness.
Happiness is elusive. It is summoned by reaching out rather than
turning inward. What we do for others is more strongly satisfying than
what we do for ourselves. From an evolutionary perspective, that is
what helps us survive as a species - whether it is barn raising on the
North Dakota prairie or fighting disease in Africa.
In our final hours we are not likely to focus on our possessions - we
shall probably think about what made our lives richer and more
fulfilling. We shall remember those moments when we experienced what
Thomas Hood described as 'a happiness that made the heart afraid'. We
shall visit memories of both happiness and sorrow, both victories and
defeats, and we might ponder how we could have lived an even better
life.
But if we have learned, and grown, and loved, and contributed, I know
the feeling we would all have: What a splendid ride! What a glorious
life!
But why did life put us through all these tests before we had learned
life's lessons? And could we not have learned those lessons before we
faced the tests?
I think we could have. That is precisely what would have changed our
lives, and the world, for the better.
How about acting on life's lessons now? Before it is too late?
.
________________________________
Tor Dahl & Associates
Productivity Improvement Seminars, Projects and Tools
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
HEALTH CARE REFORM/DENTAL CARE REFORM?
We have been hearing and reading about health care reform. I was talking to a 'wise old man' the other day and he stated that dental care is critically important to overall physical health care but it appears costs are escalating to the point that people cannot afford to 'pay upfront' for dental services so dental care is ignored.
Over 47 million are without health care insurance so over 47 million are without dental insurance. Millions more have health care insurance but do not have dental insurance.
Do we need to begin to think about DENTAL CARE REFORM ?
(you will hear more from the 'wise old man' in the near future-an engaging thought provoking individual)
Over 47 million are without health care insurance so over 47 million are without dental insurance. Millions more have health care insurance but do not have dental insurance.
Do we need to begin to think about DENTAL CARE REFORM ?
(you will hear more from the 'wise old man' in the near future-an engaging thought provoking individual)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)